Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!us.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Is Forth About Tinkering Rather than Design?
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2015 20:59:38 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <87bngqvoid.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net>
References: <mkjo13$ln0$1@dont-email.me> <DN-dnfbdXLgIdPDInZ2dnUU7-I2dnZ2d@supernews.com> <564c1313-344a-486c-a35b-55f09bc3b886@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="6ccd71891c5af5a40d6c4fb25cbad45d"; logging-data="32462"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+omXpt3insHaQ7QFTeYAbk"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aDzVaMSGORKly/yT4UNZdZ7sizw= sha1:m3qDrdziIx907ASRXBUcGXGM338=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.forth:39628

djc <ciesinger@gmx.net> writes:
> Turnaround cycles for embedded systems written in C may still be in
> the 30-45 minutes range from saving the code, compiling, linking,
> flashing to starting the debug process.

Is that for real?  On current systems where people also use Forth, not
some relic from the era where the debug cycle involved waiting for a UV
eprom eraser?  Even on such systems, it was often possible to do most of
the development and testing on a larger machine, then port to the
embedded target.  

These days I don't think it takes more than a few seconds to compile a
reasonable size C program and flash it into an Arduino.